Looking at college computer science courses around the world, am I right in
thinking that considerably more emphasis is put on Lisp and Scheme at US
universities?
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
On Oct 3, 12:52 am, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Looking at college computer science courses around the world, am I right in
> thinking that considerably more emphasis is put on Lisp and Scheme at US
> universities?
Yeah. UK & European universities tend to spend their time pissing
around with obscure functional languages that no one uses (or prolog
in AI depts).
It's the same deal as (say) general relativity: studied in physics
depts in the US and maths depts in the UK and Europe. Go figure.
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 3, 12:52 am, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>> Looking at college computer science courses around the world, am I right
>> in thinking that considerably more emphasis is put on Lisp and Scheme at
>> US universities?
>
> Yeah. UK & European universities tend to spend their time pissing
> around with obscure functional languages that no one uses (or prolog
> in AI depts).
Interesting. What would it take for US universities to catch up and teach
modern approaches?
> It's the same deal as (say) general relativity: studied in physics
> depts in the US and maths depts in the UK and Europe. Go figure.
At least here at Cambridge, GR is on the physics course.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
On 2007-10-04 16:01:10 -0400, the airborne amphibian said:
> Interesting. What would it take for US universities to catch up and teach
> modern approaches?
When did you stop beating your wife?
On Oct 4, 9:01 pm, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting. What would it take for US universities to catch up and teach
> modern approaches?
You mean so they could be as successful at producing graduates who go
on to do all the innovative and important stuff that the ones from the
UK do, like, well, inventing the internet, designing all the important
processors, creating all the important OSs and languages and ... Oh,
damn, I got that backwards, sorry.
>
> At least here at Cambridge, GR is on the physics course.
And it's taught (and all the research is done) at, erm, DAMTP, which
is part of which faculty?
--tim
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> inventing the internet,
Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
> designing all the important processors,
ARM, England.
> creating all the important OSs
Linus Torvalds, Finland.
> and languages
Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
Robin Milner (ML), from England.
G�rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA and
Scotland.
Despite being only 5% of the world's population, the US contributes a
disproportionately large amount to technological innovation (like the
transistor) but far from everything.
>> At least here at Cambridge, GR is on the physics course.
>
> And it's taught (and all the research is done) at, erm, DAMTP, which
> is part of which faculty?
Presumably DAMPT had to be put under some faculty and they chose mathematics
rather than physics. I don't understand how that is a bad decision...
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
On Oct 5, 9:47 pm, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > inventing the internet,
>
> Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
>
Yesss! Sock it to those Yankees. I'm just glad you didn't mention the
US shoulders Berners-Lee and Cailliau were standing on (Nelson,
Engelbart, Vannevar), and the US technology Berners-Lee was relying on
(NeXT, Internet). Best to forget such trifles.
> > designing all the important processors,
>
> ARM, England.
Just one? Come on, Jon, this is a pissing contest. You must come up
with more examples. It's the best way to convince yourself. Work with
me here, please.
>
> > creating all the important OSs
>
> Linus Torvalds, Finland.
Yes, a very good example of European originality. But again, Jon, next
time, think "pissing". Try to enumerate a few more.
>
> > and languages
>
> Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
> Robin Milner (ML), from England.
> G�rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
> Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
> Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
> Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA and
> Scotland.
>
That's a bit better. Some of these are even significant. However,
remember to add Prolog the next time. Also, keep in mind that there
are, by some estimates, over 1500 languages. So, if you can, you might
want to extend your list a bit.
> Despite being only 5% of the world's population, the US contributes a
> disproportionately large amount to technological innovation (like the
> transistor) but far from everything.
>
Good form, Jon! Love your use of the word "far". We'll make an eristic
out of you yet.
Semi-;-)
O.D.
On Oct 6, 6:40 am, ·······@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Just one? Come on, Jon, this is a pissing contest.
Just for the record: I guess most cll regulars know I'm British
(English, living in Soctland mostly). So I guess I'm wetting myself
here.
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:47:05 +0100, Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com>
wrote:
>Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>> inventing the internet,
>
>Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
Al Gore might have something to say about that :)
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
George Neuner wrote:
> Al Gore might have something to say about that :)
Al Gore only invented the ARPANet, which is just the boring tubes that
carry the Internet. Everyone knows that the Internet was invented by
Bill Gates in response to Netscape.
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 17:42:55 +0200, Matthias Buelow <···@incubus.de>
wrote:
>George Neuner wrote:
>
>> Al Gore might have something to say about that :)
>
>Al Gore only invented the ARPANet, which is just the boring tubes that
>carry the Internet.
That's interesting. I thought ARPAnet was created in the early 60's
... before Al Gore was in Congress in the late 70's.
>Everyone knows that the Internet was invented by Bill Gates in
>response to Netscape.
That makes much more sense. Thanks!
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
George Neuner wrote:
> That's interesting. I thought ARPAnet was created in the early 60's
> ... before Al Gore was in Congress in the late 70's.
I'm quite sure they used various AlGoreithms for the ARPAnet.
Matthias Buelow <···@incubus.de> writes:
> George Neuner wrote:
>
>> Al Gore might have something to say about that :)
>
> Al Gore only invented the ARPANet, which is just the boring tubes that
> carry the Internet. Everyone knows that the Internet was invented by
> Bill Gates in response to Netscape.
No, Steve Jobs stole it from Zerox and Bill just copied it.
--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au
Some entity, AKA Tim X <····@nospam.dev.null>,
wrote this mindboggling stuff:
(selectively-snipped-or-not-p)
> > Bill Gates in response to Netscape.
>
> No, Steve Jobs stole it from Zerox and Bill just copied it.
wrong answer, billy boy contracted it from an outfit for 5% of the
revenue but thaen gave it away for zilch,nothing zero: hence the
outfit went bankrupt.
Cor
--
Alle schraifvauden zijn opzettelijk, teneinde ieder lafaard de kans te
geven over spelling te zeuren in plaats van in te gaan op de inhoud.
(defvar My-Computer '((OS . "GNU/Emacs") (IPL . "GNU/Linux")))
http://www.clsnet.nl/mail.php
On Oct 6, 2:47 am, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
Are you aware that the web is not the internet?
>
> > designing all the important processors,
>
> ARM, England.
That is an exception, but it's the only one I can think of. I could
argue that it was a pretty derivative processor (it started of as a
pretty straight 80s-style RISC) but that would be unfair to it, I
think.
>
> > creating all the important OSs
>
> Linus Torvalds, Finland.
A Unix knock-off, big deal.
>
> > and languages
>
> Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
> Robin Milner (ML), from England.
> G�rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
> Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
> Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
> Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA and
> Scotland.
Other than C++ these are hardly important languages. C++ will probably
be recognised as one of the worst language disasters there has ever
been soon, if it has not been already.
>
> Despite being only 5% of the world's population, the US contributes a
> disproportionately large amount to technological innovation (like the
> transistor) but far from everything.
My point. Thanks.
> Presumably DAMPT had to be put under some faculty and they chose mathematics
> rather than physics.
It turns out (someone mailed me) that there is a GR course taught
within the physics dept at Cambridge, though I think all the research
and postgraduate-level stuff is at DAMTP.
> I don't understand how that is a bad decision...
No, you wouldn't.
On Oct 6, 8:15 am, Tim Bradshaw <··········@tfeb.org> wrote:
> > Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
> > Robin Milner (ML), from England.
> > G�rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
> > Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
> > Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
> > Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA and
> > Scotland.
>
> Other than C++ these are hardly important languages. C++ will probably
> be recognised as one of the worst language disasters there has ever
> been soon, if it has not been already.
Don't worry, Jon. You know how americans are in constant need of self-
reassurance. That's why they suffer badly from the Not-Invented-Here
syndrome.
Lisp has many good things going for it, but is definitely old-hat ever
since ML came out.
and Jon, you forgot Pascal, which is one of the few languages to
provide code-execution as fast as C, but much faster compilation
speeds, readability and type-safety. It was also one of the first
European languages to get the axe in the USA thanks to the syndrome.
Thus, all serious bugs in systems produced in the last 30 years due to
an ill-choice...
In article <························@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
namekuseijin <············@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 6, 8:15 am, Tim Bradshaw <··········@tfeb.org> wrote:
> > > Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
> > > Robin Milner (ML), from England.
> > > G?rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
> > > Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
> > > Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
> > > Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA and
> > > Scotland.
> >
> > Other than C++ these are hardly important languages. C++ will probably
> > be recognised as one of the worst language disasters there has ever
> > been soon, if it has not been already.
>
> Don't worry, Jon. You know how americans are in constant need of self-
> reassurance. That's why they suffer badly from the Not-Invented-Here
> syndrome.
>
> Lisp has many good things going for it, but is definitely old-hat ever
> since ML came out.
>
> and Jon, you forgot Pascal, which is one of the few languages to
> provide code-execution as fast as C, but much faster compilation
> speeds, readability and type-safety. It was also one of the first
> European languages to get the axe in the USA thanks to the syndrome.
> Thus, all serious bugs in systems produced in the last 30 years due to
> an ill-choice...
There are a lot of cool inventions from Europe.
Ada is from France. Though it was a US plot to bring down the
Soviet Union:
http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/sigplannotices/gigo-1997-04.html
Then there is Plankalkul (Konrad Zuse, 1940s) from Germany. The first
high-level non-von-Neumann programming language.
From England we got a gem: "Whitespace". A bit in the tradition
of non-standard inventions from England.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org
Rainer Joswig wrote:
> Then there is Plankalkul (Konrad Zuse, 1940s) from Germany. The first
> high-level non-von-Neumann programming language.
Ugh, I forgot the computer itself was a German invention...
> From England we got a gem: "Whitespace". A bit in the tradition
> of non-standard inventions from England.
Oi!
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
In article <···············@corp.supernews.com>,
Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
> > Then there is Plankalkul (Konrad Zuse, 1940s) from Germany. The first
> > high-level non-von-Neumann programming language.
>
> Ugh, I forgot the computer itself was a German invention...
>
> > From England we got a gem: "Whitespace". A bit in the tradition
> > of non-standard inventions from England.
>
> Oi!
From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
Konrad Zuse, born in Berlin 1910.
His greatest achievement was the world's first functional program-controlled computer,
the Z3, in 1941 .
Zuse founded the first computer startup company in 1946. This company built the Z4, which became the
first commercial computer, leased to ETH Zurich in 1950.
Wilhelm Schickard, born in Herrenberg (near Stuttgart), 1592.
He built the first non-programmable computer in 1623.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org
Rainer Joswig wrote:
> From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family. Perhaps you
and Joe Marshall aspire to be like them when you invent and post libellous
accusations.
I chose to stop contributing to Wikipedia because it was spoiled by people
like you. I was not banned. Nor was anyone else here.
Like I said before, the single biggest reason to avoid Lisp is this sickly
tirade of abuse that you will be subjected to for asking any kind of
cognitive questions...
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
Jon Harrop escribi�:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
>> From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
>
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family.
Come on!
Being anonymous, how do you know they were Lispers? "Hey, I'm an
anonymous lisper, stop spamming cll or your family will be such and
such"? Or was it "Mrs Harrop, tell your (son/husband/whatever) to stop
trolling cll or you'll be [paste your favorite death threat here]
Signed: Anonymous Lisper"?
This is the funniest thing I've read in a month! You should seriously
consider to become a professional comedian.
> I chose to stop contributing to Wikipedia because it was spoiled by
people
> like you. I was not banned. Nor was anyone else here.
Maybe we should ask the wikipedians for the recipe. After all, they got
rid of you.
> Like I said before, the single biggest reason to avoid Lisp is this
sickly
> tirade of abuse that you will be subjected to for asking any kind of
> cognitive questions...
That is no reason to avoid Lisp. That could be a reason to avoid cll,
and I'm wondering why don't you take your own advise and refrain posting
to this NG where you find the people to be mean and abusive and seem to
have taken you, poor innocent soul, as their preferred target.
Leandro
PS: Or was it: "Stop spamming cll! WE KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE. Yours truly,
Anonymous Lispers"
Jon Harrop wrote:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
>
>>From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
>
>
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family. Perhaps you
> and Joe Marshall aspire to be like them when you invent and post libellous
> accusations.
>
> I chose to stop contributing to Wikipedia because it was spoiled by people
> like you. I was not banned. Nor was anyone else here.
>
> Like I said before, the single biggest reason to avoid Lisp is this sickly
> tirade of abuse that you will be subjected to for asking any kind of
> cognitive questions...
>
I feel a "Savages!" coming on. I have Ilias's number if you need it.
Back OT, I was disappointed to see you falling back on speed after
bragging about byperbolically less code, tho that is consistent with the
web page leading with a massive graphic depicting runtimes and the Lisp
version looking as nice or nicer than the OCaml.
I gotta tell you, with speed only mattering very rarely and then in very
tight bits of code, it is hard to understand...er, why Ocaml exists?
Certainly why I would give up my big multiparadigm ball of mud for it.
ken
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"We are what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut
On Oct 6, 11:40 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
> I feel a "Savages!" coming on. I have Ilias's number if you need it.
OK, so if we assume I have a spare universe to hand (I think I do,
though technically I think it's a DR one so I'll need to check we
don't need it) how hard would it be to dump Harrop into it and arrange
for everyone else to be Ilias? I can handle the first bit, but I'm not
sure I have time for the second (or that I'm up to it actually). But
I reckon we could somehow use cells for this, right?
--tim
PS We'd also like a read-only feed of cll from there: should be very
amusing.
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 6, 11:40 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I feel a "Savages!" coming on. I have Ilias's number if you need it.
>
>
> OK, so if we assume I have a spare universe to hand (I think I do,
> though technically I think it's a DR one so I'll need to check we
> don't need it) how hard would it be to dump Harrop into it and arrange
> for everyone else to be Ilias? I can handle the first bit, but I'm not
> sure I have time for the second (or that I'm up to it actually). But
> I reckon we could somehow use cells for this, right?
>
> --tim
>
> PS We'd also like a read-only feed of cll from there: should be very
> amusing.
>
I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
kenny
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"We are what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut
On Oct 8, 3:14 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
> well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
> idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
>
> Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
Couldn't we run off some kind of simulation? They're not, after, all,
terribly smart so it wouldn't have to be realistic. It just has to be
persistent.
I'm actually thinking what we need is a T-101: something that
absolutely will not stop until their brains implode.
We probably actually need Erik
Tim Bradshaw <··········@tfeb.org> wrote:
> On Oct 8, 3:14 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
> > well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
> > idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
> >
> > Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
>
> Couldn't we run off some kind of simulation? They're not, after, all,
> terribly smart so it wouldn't have to be realistic. It just has to be
> persistent.
>
> I'm actually thinking what we need is a T-101: something that
> absolutely will not stop until their brains implode.
>
> We probably actually need Erik
How hard would it be to adapt Eliza to have it talk to Harrop?
Bob Felts escreveu:
> Tim Bradshaw <··········@tfeb.org> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 8, 3:14 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
>>> well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
>>> idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
>>>
>>> Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
>> Couldn't we run off some kind of simulation? They're not, after, all,
>> terribly smart so it wouldn't have to be realistic. It just has to be
>> persistent.
>>
>> I'm actually thinking what we need is a T-101: something that
>> absolutely will not stop until their brains implode.
>>
>> We probably actually need Erik
>
> How hard would it be to adapt Eliza to have it talk to Harrop?
You run in the risk of Eliza getting bored too soon...
ROTFL
On Oct 8, 7:44 pm, ····@stablecross.com (Bob Felts) wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw <··········@tfeb.org> wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 3:14 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> > > I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
> > > well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
> > > idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
>
> > > Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
>
> > Couldn't we run off some kind of simulation? They're not, after, all,
> > terribly smart so it wouldn't have to be realistic. It just has to be
> > persistent.
>
> > I'm actually thinking what we need is a T-101: something that
> > absolutely will not stop until their brains implode.
>
> > We probably actually need Erik
>
> How hard would it be to adapt Eliza to have it talk to Harrop?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's easy:
(defun toadliza ()
(loop
(dotimes (i (count-toad-words (read-toad-post)))
(princ "croak "))))
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 8, 3:14 pm, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I think your universe works only if they have a deadly-earnest,
>>well-meaning straight man taking them seriously, endlessly beating his
>>idiocy-deaf head against the wall of their clueless babblings.
>>
>>Who is going to break the news to Costanza?
>
>
> Couldn't we run off some kind of simulation? They're not, after, all,
> terribly smart so it wouldn't have to be realistic.
No, but even cockroaches evolved enough to run away from fast-moving
large things, and these frogs will only feed off those who genuinely
think they are having a satisfactory exchange which might reasonably
reach a fruitful conclusion. We need those blokes like Costanza and
Joswig who do not understand why the Monty Python group produced the
argument sketch since Monty Python only does comedy.
Go ahead, engage Harrop, see if you can fool him for more than a few
messages that you are the real deal. I think you'll see it's off to a
new universe for Costanza and Joswig as soon as we get clearance from
the polyverse zoning board to install your spare universe.
> It just has to be
> persistent.
>
> I'm actually thinking what we need is a T-101: something that
> absolutely will not stop until their brains implode.
>
> We probably actually need Erik
>
Well, I followed Harrop's link to his blog explaining how O'Reilly knows
nothing about selling books, and it is clear now Harrop is... well, that
would not be nice. But I think a cherished and scarce resource like Erik
should be saved for worthier tasks.
So Harrop's book for scientists sells for $160, and his /profit/ of $110
just slaughters O'Reilly. Reminds me of a Bob and Ray radio bit for
Xerox copiers. Ray seems to offer a rival copier that costs a million
dollars. Bob asks if the price isn't a little high, Ray says he only has
to sell one.
kenny
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"We are what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 18:40:56 -0400, Ken Tilton wrote:
> I gotta tell you, with speed only mattering very rarely and then in very
> tight bits of code, it is hard to understand...er, why Ocaml exists?
> Certainly why I would give up my big multiparadigm ball of mud for it.
Ocaml is a beautiful language. So is Haskell. So is Lisp. Thankfully,
programmers don't have to be monogamous with respect to their languages.
It's unfortunate that Harrop is here discouraging lispers from playing
with them.
In article <···············@corp.supernews.com>,
Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
> > From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
>
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family. Perhaps you
> and Joe Marshall aspire to be like them when you invent and post libellous
> accusations.
Dream on.
> I chose to stop contributing to Wikipedia because it was spoiled by people
> like you.
Here is the shameful documentation of you spamming Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Requestion/Archive_1#Jdh30_Warnings
> I was not banned. Nor was anyone else here.
Come on, they banned you.
You were obsessed with editing Wikipedia with your spam. The above
link gives a good impression of your activity there. Your stuff
got deleted and people were trying to explain the concept
of Wikipedia - without success. You were using different
accounts and all that sick stuff.
You now have posted more bullshit to comp.lang.lisp than to any
other newsgroup. Check out the Google statistics:
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=I_YUthUAAACWD_8VFKtRU42NeunWF-drfMq7BcOOnMpM9MYZ86CqoA
Google rating: one star. Postings to comp.lang.lisp: 754.
Postings to comp.lang.functional: 708. fa.caml: 504.
Of your 754 posts to comp.lang.lisp, about how many had useful
content? 50? 40? How many were spams and FUD? 700?
That's quite a lot for a programming language that has
been long superseded by more modern languages?
Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of
discussing things here, where your fan base is extremely
small?
> Like I said before, the single biggest reason to avoid Lisp is this sickly
> tirade of abuse that you will be subjected to for asking any kind of
> cognitive questions...
Yeah, blame other people. You are abusing comp.lang.lisp .
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org
Rainer Joswig wrote:
> Come on, they banned you.
Completely untrue.
> You were using different accounts and all that sick stuff.
Also completely untrue.
> Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of discussing things
> here, where your fan base is extremely small?
Discussing things here is concentrating on my business. This is where most
of our customers come from...
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
Jon Harrop escribi�:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
>> Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of discussing things
>> here, where your fan base is extremely small?
>
> Discussing things here is concentrating on my business. This is where most
> of our customers come from...
>
Well, thanks Jon! You finally recognize to be spamming this group.
Leandro
On Oct 6, 10:07 pm, Leandro Rios <··················@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jon Harrop escribió:
>
> > Rainer Joswig wrote:
> >> Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of discussing things
> >> here, where your fan base is extremely small?
>
> > Discussing things here is concentrating on my business. This is where most
> > of our customers come from...
>
> Well, thanks Jon! You finally recognize to be spamming this group.
>
> Leandro
Well, I would not believe a word from Mr Harrop. But it could
be that there is only a small customer base in all the other groups
(OCAML, SML, F#, ...). Either these groups are much smaller
than comp.lang.lisp or they are not buying anything or
they are not buying anything from Mr. Harrop.
I can't think of a single commercial (e.g. one that costs money)
ML (and derivates) Haskell system, while Common Lisp alone has several
commercial
implementations. Plus some companies are sponsoring open source / free
implementations. The commercial market for
Common Lisp implementations and services is not especially
large. But if Mr. Harrop does not get more sales out of the
people already using F#/OCAML/... it somehow shows. Their market
is tiny. No wonder he is so desperate to get sales.
In article <···············@corp.supernews.com>,
Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
> > Come on, they banned you.
>
> Completely untrue.
>
> > You were using different accounts and all that sick stuff.
>
> Also completely untrue.
>
> > Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of discussing things
> > here, where your fan base is extremely small?
>
> Discussing things here is concentrating on my business. This is where most
> of our customers come from...
untrue is the new true.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org
Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> writes:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
>> Come on, they banned you.
>
> Completely untrue.
>
>> You were using different accounts and all that sick stuff.
>
> Also completely untrue.
>
>> Why not concentrate on your F# business, instead of discussing things
>> here, where your fan base is extremely small?
>
> Discussing things here is concentrating on my business. This is where most
> of our customers come from...
>
Hang on, you said you had a successful consultancy, but now you say most of
your customers come from this group, yet you have repeatedly argued that
this is a group of closed minded out dated people who refuse to acknowledge
that CL is dead.
Either you don't have any real customers, or they don't come from this
group or your assessment of this group is wrong.
Regardless of which it is, thanks for putting it on record and making it
obvious that all your posts to this group have no other motivation than to
try and drum up business (even in what would appear to be an extremely
inefficient and time consuming manner). While most of us already knew you
had ulterior motives for your posts, its generous of you to state this so
openly. I am now relieved from actually giving anything you write any
consideration on the basis that it may be based on anything close to an
objective analysis.
Tim
--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au
Tim X wrote:
> Either you don't have any real customers, or they don't come from this
> group or your assessment of this group is wrong.
Our customers read this group. I don't believe they write to it.
> Regardless of which it is, thanks for putting it on record and making it
> obvious that all your posts to this group have no other motivation than to
> try and drum up business (even in what would appear to be an extremely
> inefficient and time consuming manner).
I think that's an important point. The references come in abundance from
sprawling threads that I might start but I barely have to work to maintain.
People are effectively advertising on my behalf. I noticed this when Thomas
Fischbacher spat the dummy out over Wikipedia articles citing me. He
garnered us more trade than Wikipedia ever did...
> While most of us already knew you
> had ulterior motives for your posts, its generous of you to state this so
> openly. I am now relieved from actually giving anything you write any
> consideration on the basis that it may be based on anything close to an
> objective analysis.
On the contrary, we survey the available languages and make an educated
decision on what people will want to learn about next. We're hedging our
bets at the moment, hence the products for various different languages
(Scala will be next). Then we'll see where the money is and move towards
it.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
Jon Harrop wrote:
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family.
They threatened to drain your swamp?
kenny
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"We are what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut
On Oct 7, 6:23 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family.
>
> They threatened to drain your swamp?
It's a cave. They live in caves.
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 7, 6:23 am, Ken Tilton <···········@optonline.net> wrote:
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family.
>
>>They threatened to drain your swamp?
>
>
> It's a cave. They live in caves.
>
Frogs live in caves? For the echo? Makes sense.
kenny
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"We are what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut
tadpole writes:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
>> From Wikipedia, where you are banned from spamming:
>
> Some anonymous Lispers enjoy sending death threats to my family. Perhaps you
> and Joe Marshall aspire to be like them when you invent and post libellous
> accusations.
>
> I chose to stop contributing to Wikipedia because it was spoiled by people
> like you. I was not banned. Nor was anyone else here.
>
> Like I said before, the single biggest reason to avoid Lisp is this sickly
> tirade of abuse that you will be subjected to for asking any kind of
> cognitive questions...
>
Given the supposed threats to your family and the obvious distaste the
group gives you, why do you continue to post here? Are you such a
masochist that even threats to your family are not sufficient to overcome
your perverse need for abuse?
Tim
--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2:47 am, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>> Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
>
> Are you aware that the web is not the internet?
Yes. As I understand it, who created the web is relatively clearcut but
nobody in particular invented the net. Sorry for missing off Tim
Berners-Lee (the Englishman in Switzerland).
>> > designing all the important processors,
>>
>> ARM, England.
>
> That is an exception, but it's the only one I can think of. I could
> argue that it was a pretty derivative processor (it started of as a
> pretty straight 80s-style RISC) but that would be unfair to it, I
> think.
Yes. I suspect what you were thinking was "the US manufacture most
x86-compatible desktop CPUs".
>> > and languages
>>
>> Bjarn Stroustrup (C++), from Denmark.
>> Robin Milner (ML), from England.
>> G�rard Huet (CAML and OCaml), from France.
>> Don Syme (F#), from Australia.
>> Martin Odersky (Scala), in Switzerland.
>> Paul Hudak, Simon Peyton Jones and Philip Wadler (Haskell), from the USA
>> and Scotland.
>
> Other than C++ these are hardly important languages.
Do you think the stability of the Windows platform is unimportant? Is the
billion dollar MSN Live AdCenter market unimportant?
Generics in both Java and all .NET languages were done by the guys I listed
but I suppose Java, C# and VB are all "unimportant knock-off" languages.
> C++ will probably be recognised as one of the worst language disasters
> there has ever been soon, if it has not been already.
I see, so you were only talking about "good", "important" languages invented
by Americans that aren't "knock offs". Somehow I misunderstood...
>> Presumably DAMPT had to be put under some faculty and they chose
>> mathematics rather than physics.
>
> It turns out (someone mailed me) that there is a GR course taught
> within the physics dept at Cambridge
When I did it, there were actually several GR courses taught in physics
here, in major option topic and minor option topics of the general 4-year
physics course as well as on the specialized 3-year astrophysics course.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
Jon Harrop wrote:
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>> On Oct 6, 2:47 am, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>>> Robert Cailliau (WWW), Belgium.
>>
>> Are you aware that the web is not the internet?
>
> Yes. As I understand it, who created the web is relatively clearcut but
> nobody in particular invented the net. Sorry for missing off Tim
> Berners-Lee (the Englishman in Switzerland).
I concede that Gopher was invented in the US though. :-)
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
On Oct 6, 5:47 pm, Jon Harrop <····@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
> Yes. As I understand it, who created the web is relatively clearcut but
> nobody in particular invented the net. Sorry for missing off Tim
> Berners-Lee (the Englishman in Switzerland).
I think it's fairly well known where it came from: the initials ARPA
may be a clue. You might also want to have a look at the protocols
developed in the UK at the same time. They were ... interesting (for
which read 'crap': the best thing that ever happened to them was the
quasi-legal tunnelling of IP over them).
>
> Yes. I suspect what you were thinking was "the US manufacture most
> x86-compatible desktop CPUs".
Well you suspect wrong, unsurprisingly. The System/360 design, The
Intel 4004, The PDP11, RISC, Seymour Cray's designs, POWER, SPARC,
MIPS, the Tera MTA, CMT processors. The list is just endless.
> I see, so you were only talking about "good", "important" languages invented
> by Americans that aren't "knock offs". Somehow I misunderstood...
At no point did I describe any language as a knock off (I did describe
Linux that way, and I stand by that). So thanks for putting words in
my mouth to try and twist the argument: a good, if old, trick, and one
which shows just how badly you've lost.
Never mind. Have fun trolling.
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> Yeah. UK & European universities tend to spend their time pissing
> around with obscure functional languages that no one uses (or prolog
> in AI depts).
When I finished a couple years ago, by that time everyone had moved over
to Java. It was depressing. I think there's a certain pressure on
universities to stuff more "real world" stuff into students' brains (and
ever shortening their studies) rather than enabling them to think, which
would be a hindrance anyway in a big company.
Matthias Buelow wrote:
> When I finished a couple years ago, by that time everyone had moved over
> to Java. It was depressing. I think there's a certain pressure on
> universities to stuff more "real world" stuff into students' brains (and
> ever shortening their studies) rather than enabling them to think, which
> would be a hindrance anyway in a big company.
Yes. I think we can all agree that's a bad trend...
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
In article <···············@corp.supernews.com>,
Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
> Looking at college computer science courses around the world, am I right in
> thinking that considerably more emphasis is put on Lisp and Scheme at US
> universities?
Mostly true for Lisp, but Scheme is taught in several
French Universities with many good french books (just think
of "Lisp in Small Pieces" first published in French and written
in Scheme), even if CAML is the primary language taught to
future mathematicians for example (mostly because the French
CAML team is close to the "educational power").
That reminds me the prefered choice of Maple over
Mathematica within our Universities.
Science is not always where it should be, but you know that.
-JG